Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Creationism takes less faith

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 



So let me ask you when I say I believe the universe was put in motion by God, do you think it is a valid response to ask me "If God made the universe then who made God?"


Yes, that's very valid response. Why wouldn't it be?
edit on 6-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 



So let me ask you when I say I believe the universe was put in motion by God, do you think it is a valid response to ask me "If God made the universe then who made God?"


Yes, that's very valid response. Why wouldn't it be?
edit on 6-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


Then why is it not valid for you ask the same question of your belief? Who created your creator(the universe)?Why can I not expect extraordinary evidence for this extraordinary claim?



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   


No. The claim that "It was God" is an unsupported, extraordinary claim. We atheists regard it in the same way as you regard my mars bar.


Lol the claim it wasn't God is unsupported...you have shown no evidence to back up this claim.

Semiotics of the Genetic Code
Enoch posted a great post on how physics displays the nature of God.
Semiotics hidden in Scripture (Pi) and (E)
Logical conclusion that whatever caused the big bang is supernatural by definition.

There is tons more, but you apparently fear the truth.



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb
Then why is it not valid for you ask the same question of your belief?

Who said you couldn't?


Who created your creator(the universe)?

Good question.


Why can I not expect extraordinary evidence for this extraordinary claim?

You really don't know?
edit on 6-9-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Nope. I do not know. Show me undeniable evidence that the universe was created without a creator, and explain the semiotics of the genetic code without the input of intelligent life.....



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 

The question was if you really don't know why you can't expect extraordinary evidence.



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Because God exist, but I knew you wouldnt accept that answer hahahaha

And if you expect it for my claim its only fair to expect it for yours.
edit on 6-9-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)
edit on 6-9-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 

You still have not understood the question.

Science is a work in progress. You'll get the answer from it if and when it finds it.
edit on 6-9-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Well you keep on having that faith homie. Science cant explain something outside the realm of space, time , and matter.



posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 

I guess you missed the "if" in that sentence.

The universe and DNA are inside the realm of space, time and matter.

Why the need to color atheists as faithful?



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 


Yes, but if there is not intelligent power behind the creation of the brain then it is just mindless movement of atoms.

That doesn't follow at all. In fact, it doesn't even make sense. Can you explain yourself more clearly?


so why do you trust it to do Science?

Why not? It gets results.

It does not follow from the definition you posted that anything unexplained by science is supernatural. The definition you posted merely says that supernatural phenomena are inexplicable by science. We all know this. But not all scientifically inexplicable events are supernatural. We cannot explain dark matter or dark energy, but this doesn't make them supernatural.

You are making a basic logical error here: just because all crows are birds, it does not mean that all birds are crows.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Faith means you believe in something with no proof or facts... there is no proof or facts dealing with Creationism, so it is 100% pure faith...sorry to say.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero
Faith means you believe in something with no proof or facts... there is no proof or facts dealing with Creationism, so it is 100% pure faith...sorry to say.


That is BLIND faith sir, and that is not what I have.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb
That is BLIND faith sir, and that is not what I have.

That is also not what many atheists have but you seem to think that you can drop a large blanket over all of them.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb
That is BLIND faith sir, and that is not what I have.

That is also not what many atheists have but you seem to think that you can drop a large blanket over all of them.


Did I state that atheist use Blind faith? No. I said they use the same faith as I, but because I believe the evidence is more logical for a Creator than not it takes more faith to believe atheism over creationism.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 



I said they use the same faith as I, but because I believe the evidence is more logical for a Creator than not it takes more faith to believe atheism over creationism.


Your conflating atheism and science into one and the same thing.

Atheism is simply the rejection of belief in a deity or deities.

Not all atheists accept the big bang theory.

Many do, but most of those that do accept that it is simply the best model we have currently - the one most consistent with the observed evidence, with the view that this explanation could change in future should better information come to light.

Some people just don't know enough about it, some couldn't care less.

Furthermore, not all theists reject big bang theory. In fact a great proportion accept it.

Your real argument isn't with atheism. It's with a particular theory, in a particular branch of science (cosmology etc).
edit on 7-9-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)



See that's why this passage is just nonsense -


I would also like to note that many Atheist claim a mass of energy outside our understanding of time is what caused the Big Bang...Oh so its outside this realm of existence and has the ability to create an entirely new dimension, and does so randomly, and we got lucky and landed the star dust that created us landed in the right place? Well that takes a lot more faith than saying something with intelligence put that course of action into existence and that is why we exist. You are assuming that their is no intelligent life outside this realm of existence, but yet you can assume that their was energy outside this realm of existence...if it was just a mass of energy(Spirit) could it not have a will?


People who support a particular hypothesis about the big bang theory (i.e, not atheists as written completely eroneously, but ppl who accept what may or may not be the scientific consensus (which could include theists)) in general do not profess to claim absolute knowledge of anything, it's just a theory. It's the currently accepted model, that is all.

Science is never absolute. There is always uncertainty in every figure, every assertion, every hypothesis.

Instead of strawmanning atheism with ridiculous dishonest and false histrionics like "It takes more faith to be an atheist", you should be writing letters to the cosmologists coming up with hypothesis about a theory which you happen to disagree with.
edit on 7-9-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb
explain the semiotics of the genetic code without the input of intelligent life.....

Explained right here. Goes to show that the genetic code is a huge argument against intelligent design..



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 


Of course it is. Just as it is valid for you to ask "If the singularity made the Universe than where did it come from?"

The answer is that I don't know and other than some physicists attempting to explain to a scientifically illiterate public how it IS possible to get a Universe from "nothing" I don't know of anyone who claims to know.

Both a natural and a supernatural first cause would be subject to infinite regress but by definition the supernatural cause is less plausible because it adds something we've never detected or observed, the supernatural itself.

You cannot infer the supernatural cause based on the current gap in our understanding of cosmic origins, that is just a god of the gaps plain and simple.

My personal response when the question is asked "Why is there something rather than nothing?" is to ask "Is ACTUAL nothing even possible?" To me, like the idea of perfection, nothing seems like a mere abstract concept, to assume that Universe was ever in a state where there was nothing is unnecessary. Many believers assume that God was always there... well maybe, in one form or another, the Universe has always been here. We don't need to fill the gap with a God, it does nothing to help explain anything and the natural explanations have always trumped the supernatural.

When something mysterious about lightning is discovered (such as the fact it discharges anti-matter for example) we don't invoke Zeus and go back to 500 BC thinking. In the same way when the Big Bang's cause and the creation of the singularity itself plagues us we don't reach for Yahweh, a deity that condones slavery and whose ultimate plan involved a combination of suicide, deicide and human sacrifice.

If you want to suppose a God for this gap the best you can do is deism.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Did I state that atheist use Blind faith? No. I said they use the same faith as I, but because I believe the evidence is more logical for a Creator than not it takes more faith to believe atheism over creationism.



As humans with very define starting and ending points we have a hard time comprehending something that really doesn't have a start nor an end. Our universe started at some point but then we get into the chicken or the egg senerio when we think about what comes before.

One side feels that there is an endless number of universes that operate in an endless number of ways, that come and go.

The other side feel that there is some intelligent design controlling it all.

The problem is there really is no need for an intelligent design. Looking at our universe if things were slightly different we would not be here and this universe would go through its cycle in a much different way, maybe not even making stars. Because the laws of this universe are as they are we are here, but once again our universe can just be a random of an endless number.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
 



Your conflating atheism and science into one and the same thing.

Atheism is simply the rejection of belief in a deity or deities.

Not all atheists accept the big bang theory.


Indeed. I am no more certain of the Big Bang theory than I am of God Theory. One difference between myself and many other atheists is that I am willing to wait to see what other answers may be brought to the table.


Many do, but most of those that do accept that it is simply the best model we have currently - the one most consistent with the observed evidence, with the view that this explanation could change in future should better information come to light.


Among the best, yes. But by no means the best we are capable of producing.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join